It has been argued that besides providing higher education, the government should assure its free approach for all individuals without caring about their financial status. Personally, while I accept that citizens deserve to have opportunities to attend college, I believe that all of them should not be offered freely.
On the one hand, there are several reasons why everyone should be free to pursue higher education. Firstly, stepping into the 21st century, building up an egalitarian society becomes a priority for states. Therefore, assuring equal chances to acquire tertiary degrees can be seen as an imperative mission, especially when residents are equal in intelligence and scholastic capability. The second reason is that nationwide access to higher education can help states narrow the gap between social classes. Indeed, thanks to academic knowledge acquired at college, people from disadvantaged area can keep pace with others and become competitive when applying for a well-paid job. In other words, this is not only satisfying human basic needs but also a solution to build up the nation’s sustainable development.
On the other hand, free higher education for all financial classes is inappropriate because of many reasons. Firstly, assisting students with their tuition fees will upsurge the government’s expenditure. This may become a financial burden on the authority, pushing it to the verge of bankruptcy or detrimental fiscal policy. In addition, free tuition fee will lead to a higher number of admissions. Obviously, the more students attend, the greater pressure universities will suffer. Consequently, training quality may decline due to lecturers’ difficulties in tailoring their teaching strategies, or preparation for interactive learning.
In brief, although equal chances to attend universities should be ubiquitous, it is unwise for the government to provide free higher education for everyone.
- The diagram illustrates the process that is used to manufacture bricks for the building industry. Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant. 56
- The table below shows information and predictions regarding the change in percentage of the population aged 65 and above in three countries 76
- The graph shows the information about the international conferences in three capital cities in 1980 – 2010.Summarise the main character and make comparison where relevant. 78
- Organized tours to remote places and communities is increasingly popular Is it a positive or negative development for the local people and environment 10
- The graph below shows the consumption of fish and some different kinds of meat in a European country between 1979 and 2004.Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 73
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, consequently, first, firstly, if, may, second, so, therefore, well, while, in addition, in brief, in other words, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 13.1623246493 84% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 10.4138276553 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 24.0651302605 66% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 41.998997996 83% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 8.3376753507 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1662.0 1615.20841683 103% => OK
No of words: 290.0 315.596192385 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.73103448276 5.12529762239 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12666770723 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.11548623155 2.80592935109 111% => OK
Unique words: 189.0 176.041082164 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.651724137931 0.561755894193 116% => OK
syllable_count: 521.1 506.74238477 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 32.9205103241 49.4020404114 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.8 106.682146367 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.3333333333 20.7667163134 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.0666666667 7.06120827912 143% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.194547720845 0.244688304435 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0624170179518 0.084324248473 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0432674152332 0.0667982634062 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.125411541072 0.151304729494 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0319305727416 0.056905535591 56% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.2 13.0946893788 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 35.27 50.2224549098 70% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.3001002004 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.95 12.4159519038 128% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.13 8.58950901804 118% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 78.4519038076 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.